mirror of
https://github.com/xemu-project/xemu.git
synced 2024-11-23 11:39:53 +00:00
HACKING: List areas where we may rely on impdef C behaviour
Add a section to HACKING saying which version of the C spec we use and describing the bits of implementation defined C compiler behaviour which C code in QEMU is allowed to rely on. Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
288fa40736
commit
475363176c
20
HACKING
20
HACKING
@ -123,3 +123,23 @@ gcc's printf attribute directive in the prototype.
|
||||
This makes it so gcc's -Wformat and -Wformat-security options can do
|
||||
their jobs and cross-check format strings with the number and types
|
||||
of arguments.
|
||||
|
||||
6. C standard, implementation defined and undefined behaviors
|
||||
|
||||
C code in QEMU should be written to the C99 language specification. A copy
|
||||
of the final version of the C99 standard with corrigenda TC1, TC2, and TC3
|
||||
included, formatted as a draft, can be downloaded from:
|
||||
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/WG14/www/docs/n1256.pdf
|
||||
|
||||
The C language specification defines regions of undefined behavior and
|
||||
implementation defined behavior (to give compiler authors enough leeway to
|
||||
produce better code). In general, code in QEMU should follow the language
|
||||
specification and avoid both undefined and implementation defined
|
||||
constructs. ("It works fine on the gcc I tested it with" is not a valid
|
||||
argument...) However there are a few areas where we allow ourselves to
|
||||
assume certain behaviors because in practice all the platforms we care about
|
||||
behave in the same way and writing strictly conformant code would be
|
||||
painful. These are:
|
||||
* you may assume that integers are 2s complement representation
|
||||
* you may assume that right shift of a signed integer duplicates
|
||||
the sign bit (ie it is an arithmetic shift, not a logical shift)
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user